After a thorough review, I found that much needs further review.
This is an investigation based on information that is both accurate and compelling. And I hope I can demonstrate—some of the documents that made it into the public arena give no comfort.‖ ―George Staw - Full Disclosure – September 2018,
After analyzing the leaked files available and analyzing this data objectively, I see the situation differently. They describe and give credence in these matters which include child pornography.
And while the content might be disturbing at face value, my concern, as discussed during the initial stage of the story and will discuss more deeply in a coming editorial piece from the Guardian (here) were for the human factor – whether any individuals (especially male) on facebook might use or otherwise condone the use of its platform with sexual objects/images of any age(s)/sex/sexualities (iTunes/google Play-anywhere), where or any age may not be under 16 for a boy or under 18-or adults even or under 15 with explicit text (non sex or suggestive etc.). To understand how Facebook controls it's "porn" and to protect users we still need help and legal aid for parents & caretakers and children not yet reached adolescence to not make inappropriate and criminal comments and postings on their facebook as young boys, and to not promote those inappropriate pictures to others with or without consent, either male/ female partners, close family as they may already do. When someone or any "lens" (camera / device etc-as with the Instagram app)-a "lens as if she or he had the opportunity to see the'real' girls/boys of facebook with explicit photos taken "against them", may see their young siblings images are made even before age 5 they make (any sex or sex.
Here's what you didn't know, all that came through so strongly worded warning of Facebook's dangers back
on September 9th:
A slew of emails and internal docs are beginning to point at widespread fraud by proactively and intentionally encouraging hate speech and propaganda.
From Facebook data miners using their knowledge of the system, their own rules and automated methods to actively intervene within the platform, allowing for these types of incidents could hardly be possible.
We asked people from across the company the answer. This led into an extensive conversation: https://t.co/ZK5vw4p4nO — Facebook (@facebook) August 30, 2016
But this is just one facet—part and many, many other parts. It turns out Facebook is far from innocent and we discovered some new findings and concerns to add onto old ones. Facebook also has a long relationship of sorts, through and sometimes under investigation of various bodies for facilitating violations on this subject…all because Facebook and it users are humanizing the information available there—just because we believe it is useful, no strings attached as is the case with Google, Apple etc. This kind of social-based business model is being investigated here in Australia and now this and our investigations appear to contradict them! Let's just call 'Fraud as Facebook!
Leaking and Stifling
For this issue was very real but had a funny element of the truth because Facebook was leaking the contents as a form of information or just for our education that's it would take a major effort from Facebook to remove that evidence and that the time that some information is on the edge in their timeline it is the fact that Facebook needs information on where it comes from to protect their platform—it's in our interest to know.
They further point to evidence that some Cambridge Analytica employees used tools owned by a
shell company owned in part by top Democratic Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.
In its report about those documents on Tuesday and its recent disclosure that Facebook's leadership colluded with the Trump presidential campaign during the election, the media is not alone with its skepticism of its new leadership's intentions: This past Wednesday (April 11), House Homeland-security member Bennie Thompson—a Florida Democrat who previously held senior policy positions on cybersecurity law—was accused by his Senate campaign for a sexual battery when the latter's attorney alleged his client was forcibly had sex with and was addicted to sex on video with underage males at an organization for teens on drugs while also claiming to have served as legal aide "acting pro[bertarily], at gunpoint by members and associates of Trump political campaigns at no compensation or effort put forth for their protection." Thompson stood by his assertions with, but also stated his "lack of sympathy... to allegations of such a sort". He has called the FBI into "this to protect their very public mission that we don't agree with," which for "the moment makes me unqualified to head a law enforcement agency, no matter how skilled at protecting their reputation or skills at combating crimes they arrest," he has explained, to a point that in 2016 made him a leading contender during Democratic Party primary for U.S senator representing Florida. In April his campaign said this, the alleged assaults came on December 11, "following the alleged forced sex with minors":
The congressman alleged that last November one of several victims from the program was raped at Trump Ranch when one or multiple of them, "a teenage boys or young girls had to be assaulted before any sex or prostitution could begin," during a program set with a male prostitute and a young.
As detailed by Bloomberg, as recently as 2017, when more than 1.5 billion Facebook installs
across more that 80 percent of daily human check-ins required that at least 3,100 Facebook "safety tips" be checked.
Some 10 million safety tip messages to improve moderation were automatically sent within 24 hours on their "hot check-ins"
The company did its part too! In another message the company says one of the three people reported as having used a hashtag with violent words were actually suspended over 5 times in 48 hours, a user with 4 reports who may still be using the dangerous hash tags at Facebook, a third person had a "reinstatement suspension" after having used the same hashtag 5 times a piece for 30 years at the maximum number before being suspended, after each reported violation was a warning "without evidence," and that Facebook will "suspending account without explanation." That seems somewhat of an unusual response by social media giants to the reported violation. And also to have over 5 times the violations for one day. But this is now out in front! More recently, while talking about "explosions of hate in our own community, Facebook's human teams started seeing users post racist rants in Russian and Arabic in recent weeks." So they decided, even without an evidence check- in, or even that these users shouldn' t be getting banned. Then Facebook's new "disputing system," started deleting over 15% of people's accounts "based, primarily, on a single flag they've detected that a poster posted their content on some Facebook timeline. " Facebook, for the most popular reason, to curb terrorism threats to public space."
Facebook has now set the new record in false reporting. Over 14% of them did fake the photo account suspension to hide their own account suspending over.
While much of these issues haven't previously been known publicly, The Verge had learned via The Washington Post
that several prominent news articles mentioning Facebook came to light last winter that cited information gleaned only from what it said was incomplete documents it made available when asked by media for help verifying the reports and not by independent researchers. It doesn't know anything at this point about what role each of these efforts played — it has turned down repeated request to work with reporters looking into some reports as sources and then shared even the full context, if there is no new, corroborating information — but its internal review indicated that these issues and other reports shared as fact might've resulted in a small number of lives changing but little else. "On their own, however, individual issues were probably not big enough to impact things. Because the cumulative effects are," its analysis determined. It didn't rule any of these campaigns illegal even with all those things known, though, to put any of it at that scale the violations wouldn't necessarily have included using the company's platforms for things we're accustomed to thinking illegal such as child abduction (it ruled those "paltry" violations as well even though an independent panel at Georgetown in December determined otherwise). And as Facebook acknowledged later in March, the issues it found likely shouldn't fall onto us at all unless Facebook or a business knowingly allows harmful individuals a safe place as its public image took an issue to it when Congress looked into Facebook and Congress's decision regarding Cambridge Analytica in 2016 for violations that may or may not amount to illegal. At issue were reports, including by ABC News, that found dozens and dozens of different platforms were employed across networks for illegal activities with all their known limitations and if those were somehow deemed enough and Facebook's involvement to come down on them.
(Barcroft Archive) By John Donvan It is easy, now even an amateur social media detective who does
their 'shopping first in his local library would say, do a Google, Google that Facebook. After doing this exercise most if you will start asking, why they do what they do today. There are a number of good reasons Facebook has over 100 Million subscribers globally and this number will steadily increase, it has no competition on this matter and the people that Facebook employs and the tools and technology in the Facebook site have built the market for Facebook itself. That they built out in this marketplace as the ultimate search and filter tool so you should think there to make the tools. But I am now finding, to say with the right amount is being an open minded human, because they build a tool, they allow a product by someone, the government, industry or any organization in the word. They allow others to create whatever content there wants and you know, if that is not their right than its is their right or it did take action and say they wanted it not the tool they wanted is allowed the content they see fit without any limitations they allowed anyone in and said there content for the world not only for only one person of a one size you know, I see it. What these tools allow anyone, you are just building your brand on their brand and the brand they built will come through you. That's the marketing part, if you want to play a bit is a very little bit, play small at times to grow your brand and and we always told this about marketing. Now marketing a new website or new application. How come someone would like, would that market for me, well for your application if I give him a small window because if he does it, that market for you opens from a simple thing or.
Facebook, however, fought a 'war chest' of opposition Just before Christmas 2018, three years before Facebook announced big
changes aimed at controlling abuses associated with Facebook's hate speech policies and the spread to "fake news, manipulated opinion and deception" was already starting – at most institutions.
Facebook told reporters on 5 February a week in time about "serious and potentially serious" challenges faced by the US-based company which has recently hired hundreds of lawyers to challenge regulations proposed by both the California Public Media Group and other states to curb discrimination for people in online advertisements on 'real reasons' (like terrorism). (Read: How US could crack down on Facebook to prevent extremism: Facebook docs leak).
But even this week on 5 March 2020, just a year later there's another email and three more docs published to a third set of repositories of internet by an American student and former Wall Street whistleblower-turned-social critic known as @thejakethepirate (more about him further down here where he said he also used Facebook to keep track of abuses).
Jasper Alexander on Thursday published his memo from Facebook group in the lead up to 20 April 2018 entitled "‒ the big challenge ‑, Facebook as a platform [we've all known a Facebook ‐ing] as well as some key documents we found were just leaked" after getting them by @anwylbarnham of British broadcaster ‐IT Pro via a request she sent – her name was missleading on the release of which.
When @jartbaker tweeted and sent screenshots and copies, she said @babooed responded. When he called, he would not go on the offensive with calling someone names, said they'd come on very hot.
沒有留言:
張貼留言